NIC Reeves & The Blunder Stuff – politicalbetting.com
NIC Reeves & The Blunder Stuff – politicalbetting.com
Rachel Reeves said repeatedly during the run-up to the Budget that she would have to raise taxes because of a productivity downgrade by the OBRThe Office for Budget Responsibility has today suggested that was not the caseHere is what Reeves said publicly – and what the OBR…
0
Comments
https://x.com/jacksurfleet/status/1994544616398315846
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/11/18/the-chancer-of-the-exchequer/
@AndyJS
I share your concerns about social media but there are dangers what the Australians are doing:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/27/teens-high-court-injunction-australia-under-16s-social-media-ban
From the link:
“This issue should concern every Australian,” Ruddick said in a statement. “This ban is disproportionate and will trespass either directly or indirectly upon the rights of every Australian.
“This ban is a direct assault on young people’s right to freedom of political communication. But it’s worse than that. Come December 10 all kids will be banned, and all the rest of us will have to prove our age and potentially provide ID just to access social media.”
Under the ban, platforms can accept ID as one form of age check, but it must not be the sole method of identification.
Both Meta and Snap Inc have said they will use ID checks as a fallback option in the event that facial age estimation incorrectly estimates an account to be held by someone under 16. Both companies have said they have methods of determining which accounts are likely to be held by children under 16."
Maybe I'm too partisan to see.
Is the argument the opposition is making that the economy is actually doing quite well and we didn't need raise taxes to afford additional spending?
It’s completely incomprehensible to me.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fn6yEP3dvMQ
But there's also something profound on the right. Boris was brought down for being caught lying. Flat-out telling of untruths. So some would Absolutely Love It if they could do the same to this government.
Will be a problem next time round when there may be some pushback to spend more on Sandy's chavs and their children.
Edit: just saw Battlebus’s comment above re this all being about party management, which is plausible to me.
That suggests a £100 bn hole, black or otherwise.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/29/how-motability-cuts-went-from-a-rightwing-online-campaign-to-rachel-reevess-budget
The story which will run and run is of a government whose emphasis looks as if its big priority, at the expense of workers, is those on benefits, with a sub text of a priority of raising taxes to fund higher pay in the public sector, and a sub sub text of cushioning pensioners.
Thresholds + salary sacrifice + IHT on small businesses and farms + employers NI.
The DM and Goodwin can run benefits abuse stories every day. They exist. IMHO they are right to scrap the 2 child cap; but the issue of whether too much money is going in benefits in the wrong direction remains.
As TimS alludes, it's leaden, flat footed politics, but it need not be considered any more than that.
We ban the purchase of alcohol and smoking to a similar age for a similar reason.
I said yesterday that Labour cannot let that perception take hold in the long run. If they’re still going into the next GE as being perceived as having redistributed earnings to welfare they will be in serious trouble unless we’ve had much better growth and people are feeling generally better off.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/29/ryanair-scraps-vip-scheme-customers-too-many-cheap-flights/ (£££)
But you can't expect everyone to be that smart.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/nov/28/people-deriving-income-solely-from-state-pension-wont-be-taxed-says-chancellor
At least, that's my understanding.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg4nzp6ezg7o
Stay safe, everyone, and if you can't stay safe, stay tasteful.
TikTok and to a lesser extent YouTube (my daughter’s goggling at it currently) eat the brain by auto playing hour after hour of mindless content. Worse than multi-channel TV? Maybe not, but mobiles mean screen time can expand to fill most of the day.
X, Bluesky and other political platforms encourage division and hate. To my mind they’re the most damaging to society, but the damage is also being done to adults.
Instagram turns children and adults into body-obsessed poseurs.
By contrast, I don’t think messaging apps like WhatsApp or Snapchat should be lumped in the same category. They are a mode of social expression and probably increase rather than reduce interaction with friends. Yes there are risks of online bullying, but you can set up text chats too which are essentially the same thing.
Then there’s LinkedIn which despite the nauseating corporate nonsense that often fills it up is a largely harmless space for teenagers.
I don’t think this will do for her, and yes in some ways there’s a positive spin to it all, but it does give another angle to her not being entirely straight with people. Which given the general perception of clumsy dishonesty that hangs around Labour, isn’t great for them.
Successive chancellors have cut the contingency reserve to fund planned spending, which means they've nothing left in the kitty for surprises.
It's all a bit of a shell game, considering our long term running of a deficit, but it piques the attention of the debt markets when the annual numbers don't add up.
Planned borrowing in generally rather cheaper than unplanned borrowing.
More headroom means the precise accuracy of the guesses (which aren't particularly accurate) doesn't matter as much.
I don't follow the Sun, Mail or DT closely at all but I don't remember them being effusive about the last government.
How would anyone start 'championing' the present government? They can't even champion themselves.
(Anecdote: I was brought up in a DTelegraph and Times household, 60 years ago. My DT reading father said to me of the DT as it was then: their straight news is extensive and reliable; their editorial comment is rubbish; if you want the truth, read the city pages.)
And in any case, if like me you've had your social media accounts open for longer than 16 years, I suspect they can work it out without asking for ID.
And if it ends up with fewer adults on social media who don't want to show ID, I'd consider that an ancillary benefit of the policy.
Anyone know how the OSA is settling down?
Maybe the Aussies need something like the Drinkaware scheme for pubs (in Scotland only?) where the teen gets an ID card like a bus pass. I don't think the card is used for anything else.
Were the fibs all told outside Parliament, or did she tell some to the Commons too ?
That would likely be terminal.
Continuity Bojo.
There are also a number of cliff edges within benefits legislation such as with Pension Credit and all the extras that come with it. Triple lock, WFA, and Motability all create these edges which allow people to create wedge issues in the media and politics.
But bear in mind, that the current welfare structure was designed over 20 years ago by someone called Ian Duncan Smith. He made a decent fist of it in that it has characteristics of an insurance scheme, but perhaps he needs to be called back to revisit his efforts and improve it.
6000 A320s need immediate software or hardware upgrades.
Perhaps a typo? Cannot?
People don't like paying more tax. Of course in focus groups they say don't put up income tax. But if you are going to put up 10 other taxes instead that is no more popular, and less effective.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/nov/11/keir-starmer-allies-ousting-pm-would-be-reckless-fears-leadership-challenge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
He seriously thinks 50 year mortgages are a good thing.
Creating effectively renting for life but without the ease of moving tenancies that exist for renters like not having to sell the place or worry about the equity.
Almost as daft as shared equity.
https://x.com/kobeissiletter/status/1994515607749075195?s=61
Interview with Jeremy Corbyn as the Your Party conference starts in Liverpool…
Are you friends with Zarah Sultana?
We’re “colleagues in parliament”, he says.
https://x.com/robpowellnews/status/1994699611794026766
Mind you I got roped into doing 5 TikTok videos talking about the budget in the last 3 weeks, so I suppose I’m part of the problem.
Whether that actually comes to pass in the run up to an election is up for debate.
The worry is that if you have young people with no access to the internet until they hit their 16th birthday, they then get hit with everything. Rather like giving them a Ferrari on their 16th birthday and saying "Have fun!"
How long do you give any government, new in office in 2024, before the basics of how such things are 'right now' is not the responsibility of the past, but of the present government and parliament?
I suggest roughly this, assuming no black swans: Within two years it is reasonable to expect everything the state undertakes to be responsible for is run competently and well.
Within 3-4 years the legislative framework under which it wants to work should be in place and running; with the public having a clear idea of the direction of travel for the future.
(So the gangs should be smashed and the small boats stopped pretty soon).
1. They wanted to do a massive tax rise, including income tax (possibly offset partially by a NI cut).
2. They decided that the argument for this would have to be necessity, and the OBR had given them convenient cover to do so, with the productivity downgrade.
3. They ignored the following inflation and wages upgrade as it did not fit the narrative.
4. Plans changed when Starmer's leadership was threatened, and it was decided to take income tax off the table
5. So really, there was no impact.
It speaks of chaos and a completely shite Government and Treasury team, but it doesn't really speak of a swindling the public, because due to a fluke, that didn't end up happening.
I think that is long gone, and the change is less than twenty years old. Pretty much all news is now an editorialisation of events, broadsheet, tabloid, gb news or the BBC. People want the news that coincides with their own views and wanted presented in that way, and if the legacy media don't do it they go elsewhere.
The BBC generally does a better job of it, but it has in house sacred cow perspectives that are protected at all costs. Some of those have been exposed recently, but even then, they make a better stab.
I agree that IDS probably has a good legacy on the mechancis of welfare. A reforming government (which we do not have to any extent at all) would roll many more benefits and payments into UC. The dream would be a Universal Income Tax to pair with Universal Credit, all on one system, that ensures there are no cliff-edges and everyone gets their correct payment/tax automatically.
They’ve expelled a bunch of SWP members. Sultana seems unhappy about this.
Boris's government was corrupt, so you would expect removing it should fix that matter immediately. Truss's was batshit crazy and incompetent, so again dismissal puts that right straight away. The problems we face with the economy and state of public services are however more long term and are the cumulative result of protracted neglect. The last Chancellor to hand over an economy in decent repair was Ken Clarke and scant reward he got for it. Maybe if voters rewarded success more we'd get better government?
Anyway I think it would be unreasonable to expect a new Government to fix the long term problems in a couple of years. Give me a call in three more and I'll let you know how I thought they got on.
I'm personally quite upset that nothing similar to this is happening under this government - it's nothing idealogical, I just want governments to do general housekeeping and sensible reforms as a bare minimum.
I can't understand why Ms Reeves is even talking about removing IT from the basic state pension when all she needs tgo do is to ask SKS to order DWP to extract digit and implement PAYE on the state pensions (including SSP if not already done - I'm not sure about this), providing annual P60s, and calculating annual income like other human beings do.
The obvious places to try this would the Guardian or Times. Neither come close SFAICS. The BBC now falls between two stools; it doesn't do old style 'John Tusa' solemn objectivity but neither is it allowed to do sharp edged stuff like LBC (Simon Marks!) or Andrew Neil on Times radio.
The other question is Why? I suspect the main reason is that opinions are free and facts are expensive.
Am I the only personj to miss the rise in the FSCS limit to 120K? Edit: cash accounts only.
For example, the governing body of a certain sport published a list of people who were banned from coaching and participating in events in any way. Gross misconduct, criminal behaviour etc.
Several of them got their lawyers on it. Who made a case that under the OSA…
That’s with the courts now.
Mind you, I'm not sure what I'd say if asked whether I was 'friends' with someone I worked with, not least someone less than half my age. This is nothing to do with my colleagues, who are affable and pleasant, and everything to do with the middle-aged Englishman's inability to categorise anyone as a 'friend' who hasn't been in that category for at least ten years and ideally since your teens.
I caught a bit of program my wife was watching, yesterday. A journalist with a seated audience explaining through the budget, rather well.
He’d interviewed Reeves, and was explaining the detail of what she’d said (using clips from the interview), popular misconceptions etc. Actually educative. Anyone know what the show was? Only heard some fragments - was in another room.
Anyway, he showed that the statement about the basic pension not being taxed was really full of caveats about when/where/how.
However, she is now out of the running for the Labour leadership and likely to be replaced when he retires.
Assuming, of course, she doesn't suddenly jack it all in out of frustration. But she doesn't seem to me to be a person who will willingly admit failure or inadequacy.